Skip to content

Month: September 2011

The Pledge of Allegiance Issue Returns in the People’s Republic

Well, the old Pledge of Allegiance issue is back in the news again, here in the People’s Republic of Massachusetts, specifically here in the Boston area, in the People’s Republic of Brookline, home of Michael Stanley Dufus Dukakis. Why must children be made to recite a loyalty oath to a flag? Okay, so it’s really a loyalty oath to America. Or is it? Sadly, this issue — which in the past has had people needlessly arguing whether the word “God” should be in the Pledge — is bringing up the generations-old confusion in many people between our country and our government.

There are two specific things: our country (America); and the federal government. It is unfortunate that when people criticize our government, some others perceive that criticism as being criticism of our country. For example, one of Sean Hannity’s rants against Ron Paul is Dr. Paul’s criticism of U.S. government foreign policy, which consists of our government and military trespassing on foreign lands for a century, especially since World War II. But the ignoramus Hannity thinks that is criticizing our country, as he foams, “Blame America, blame America,” etc. No, Ron Paul and others criticize our government’s actions, not our country.

In many people’s eyes, the Pledge of Allegiance really is a pledge of allegiance to our government, right or wrong, because they confuse country with government. Sure, being loyal to the U.S.A., especially if you live here, is a good idea, but, loyalty to our government?

Should I be loyal to a government whose professional bureaucrats and politicians start wars of aggression and solely for political reasons and never for actual defense? Should I be loyal to that government whose ineptitude and incompetence, and criminal aggression against others who are of no threat to us, led to hundreds of thousands of deaths overseas throughout the 1990s that caused blowback and retaliation against us? And then, as good little socialists would do, doubled and tripled their aggressions after 9/11?

Should I be loyal to that government whose corrupt and mentally unstable legislators rammed through an UnhealthyCare bill in the dead of night, with one new bureaucracy after another, one new intrusion into our private medical matters after another, that will raise the costs of health care and insurance and ultimately will end up giving the Soviet-wannabe leaders Obama et al the Total State Powers they dream of?

Should I be loyal to that government which employs thousands and thousands of sexual perverts and sickos, sticking their hands down people’s underwear and fondling their genitals, as well as operating cancer-causing machines whose only purpose is to make a good profit for the corporate neanderthals who produce them?

Should I be loyal to that government whose counterfeiting presses and computers fraudulently hand out new “legal tender” “Federal Reserve Notes” to the cartel of State-controlled and State-protected bankers, which devalues the currency that all Americans are forced by law to use, thus raising the prices of food and energy sources they need to buy, that the super-rich bankers don’t have to worry about?

Should I be loyal to that government whose idiot “lawmakers” rammed through a “Patriot” Act bill in the dead of night without reading the bill, that violates the God-given inalienable private property rights and individual rights to presumption of innocence, due process, and the right to be free from searches in the absence of suspicion, and all based on post-9/11 fears and paranoia and government propaganda?

No, I am not loyal to that federal government, the one single institution that is most responsible for the trashing of our liberty, the coming economic collapse and civil unrest. There is no reason to be loyal to an institution whose professional bureaucrats and politicians have acted treasonously against these United States — yes, all 50 of them! — an institution that is inherently doomed to fail, because central planning in and of itself doesn’t work and is one walking usurpation after another. Central planning does not work, and I’m sick of all this. Everything the U.S. government has done has been against the interests of the United States, and against the American people, and it is the U.S. government and all its generations of bureaucrats and politicians, lobbyists and lawyers, and other imbeciles, dirtbags and miserable wretches, who have been the MOST disloyal to the people of the United States.

We need to drop the federal government like a hot potato, before it kills us all off. Each and every state needs to secede and retain its independence and sovereignty, and the people of each state need to take back their God-given right to earn a living, do business and prosper, and raise and educate their children, without federal criminal gangsters sticking their grubby paws in everybody’s piggybanks and down their pants.

I am loyal to America, but not to the government. Besides, there is no reason for a loyalty oath, this Pledge of Allegiance. People should be presumed innocent and left alone, and the children should be left alone to do their schoolwork. Americans’ loyalty to their country should be automatically presumed, and these school bureaucrats should shut up and leave the kids alone and stop trying to forcibly indoctrinate obedience to the government in our kids. We also need to completely abolish government-run and government-controlled schools. They are worthless.

Loyalty to America? Sure. Loyalty to the government? NO!


UPDATE: I was just listening to Michael Graham talking abut this. He believes that there should be no problem if kids want to “show patriotism” with this supposedly voluntary pledge, and Graham mocked those who were worrying about kids being “pressured” to recite the pledge and that it could become a possible cause of “bullying.”

First, this recitation of a loyalty oath is not a “show of patriotism.” It is a show of obedience — specifically to the State, and especially with government schools.

Second, the whole point of this standing up collectively to recite a pledge in unison to a flag, but really, to the government, is a groupthink mentality. Our “democracy” is all about mob rule groupthink collectivism, that punishes the individual for dissent.

What if a kid — an intelligent teen who knows what’s going on in the news, or a younger kid who feels he should reflect his parents’ views — has a problem with what our government has been doing (the crimes and aggressions and intrusions as mentioned above), and he doesn’t want to stand and join the collective group to recite this loyalty oath to the State?

Or what if a high school kid in far-left Brookline has a problem with Obama’s UnhealthyCare, which caused his parents to have to pay double or triple their previous insurance rate, and he viewed the flag as symbolizing the Obama Administration. Do you really believe that his “opting out” of pledging allegiance, along with his expressed criticism of Obama, will be met with tolerance by his fellow students?

I think that many of us know quite well what would happen to such kids. (Perhaps it has been many, many, many years (and decades) since Graham was in high school, so he forgets.)

Move Out of Orwellian New Jersey

Wendy McElroy has been giving us many great articles and blog posts on the latest police state intrusions. Her newest one is to do with a new “anti-bullying” law in New Jersey. It was Gov. Christie who signed the bill into law last January. McElroy details the idiocy of the bill, and how obviously Christie could not possibly have read the actual bill before signing it — either that or his judgment is so bad, this should make even Ann Coulter change her mind about him. This is called an “Anti-Bullying Bill of Rights” law. But what this law actually does is it violates several rights that the real Bill of Rights addresses. This is typical statist crap. Here is just some of McElroy’s article:

The following are merely some of the predictable new difficulties:

Anonymous tips encourage maliciously false accusations.
The bill attempts to forestall this criticism by stating that the tip line “shall not be construed to permit formal disciplinary action solely on the basis of an anonymous report.”

What about two anonymous tips? A student could call twice or a clique could target someone. The onus of proof is on the accused with no consequences borne by the accusers. Moreover, the Crimestopper hotline assumes that grade-schoolers are able to accurately distinguish between bullying and mere rudeness or a refusal to associate.

Children are being taught to inform on peers to the police.
The New York Times reported that “students will be told that there is no such thing as an innocent bystander when it comes to bullying: if they see it, they have a responsibility to try to stop it.”

That not only elicits images of children snitching to the East German Stasi on neighbors and ”friends” but also teaches that snitching to a police force should be the first option, rather than talking to the offending person or standing up for the abused student.

The definition of bullying is unreasonably broad.
According to the bill, conduct that is “good cause for suspension or expulsion” includes, “Continued and willful disobedience; Open defiance of the authority of any teacher or person having authority…; Participation in an unauthorized occupancy … of any part of any school or other building owned by any school district, and failure to leave … promptly after having been directed to do so…; Harassment, intimidation, or bullying.” “Harassment, intimidation, or bullying” includes “any gesture, any written, verbal or physical act, or any electronic communication.”

The bill appropriately prohibits violence against persons and property but school (and state) laws have addressed such offenses for many years. The new prohibitions sound more like social control than a concern for safety.

Nonphysical bullying, such as offending a classmate, is being criminalized.
The police involvement extends beyond the tip line. The bill mandates that “in consultation with the Attorney General, [the police] shall develop a training course for safe schools resource officers and public school employees assigned by a board of education to serve as a school liaison to law enforcement.”

Inappropriate but nonphysical behavior among children is now to be addressed by police policies and training programs.

Read the full article

More reasons to completely abolish “public schools” or government-run schools. The totalitarian police state in which we now live, and only getting worse, led proudly by Barack Obomber and Jamit Napalmitano, is now reaching down into the schools.

If you have kids in New Jersey government schools, you need to take them out and put them in private schools, or homeschool them. Or better yet, move out of New Jersey. Succumbs to Pressure of Obama’s Censorship Regime

Apparently, the Obama Regime has reached down to, one of the most popular blogging sites on the Internet, and has gotten WP to “suspend” Rick Rozoff’s website, Stop NATO.

Now, I believe in the right of publishers to control the material on publications — print or electronic — that they own. “The owner of the printing press” has the property right of control (including censoring what they don’t want on their own publication). Whoever the actual owner(s) of are, it is their right to suspend whatever bloggers they have allowed to publish on their website, and to delete whatever material they want.

However, as Rozoff notes in the above link, “no incitement to violence or other illegal action, no attempt to solicit money and no derogatory statement toward any demographic group have ever appeared” on Stop NATO or its mailing lists.

Now, I have been viewing Stop NATO periodically over the past year or two, and I have never seen anything that could be considered objectionable on that blog. Rozoff (not to be confused with contributor Michael Rozeff) mainly details the latest schemes and fiascos that NATO has been involved in, and provides many news links for source information. Here is his latest post. Here is a randomly selected post from a few months ago, and here is a randomly selected post from 2009.

Rozoff is correct in his conclusion that the sole reason for the “suspension” of his blog is “being anti-war and anti-militarist.” And anti-NATO. What really gets me is that the complaint is regarding NATO, an international crime syndicate and mass-murdering war machine that people should be criticizing.

NATO, or the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, was formed in the years shortly after World War II, with an agreement among member nations to collectively come to each other’s defense if one were attacked by a non-member country or government. I can see the heavy emotionalism involved in the founding of this group, following so much conflict throughout Europe and Asia during World War II. However, the wisdom of forming such an organization is extremely questionable, and, really its founding was the result of short-term fear of a possible emergence of “another Hitler” or “another Stalin,” etc, at the expense of long-term security of all the nations involved.

In the past 20 years especially, NATO has done nothing good, and has caused only harm, especially to Iraq and Serbia-Kosovo-”Yugoslavia” (More info on NATO’s and Bill Clinton’s ethnic cleansing campaign in Kosovo here and here.) And now, Libya.

In fact, Tony Cartalucci has this article on how the Libyan “rebels,” whom NATO has been supporting, have been listed as “terrorists” by the U.S. State Department, in which NATO could be seen as having been providing “material support” for terrorism, under the U.S. government’s own laws.

And while many will applaud the corporate media for coming forward with this information, it should be noted that Pepe Escobar first broke this story on Russia Today, and the US and British propaganda outlets have merely been forced to address the growing public awareness of who these “pro-democracy” rebels really are and what role the US and British governments have had in betraying their people by providing material support for men who literally killed US and UK troops in both Iraq and Afghanistan over the 10 year “War on Terror.”

According to US Code Section 2339A & 2339B, the leaders of NATO, along with the US, UK, and French governments, are clearly guilty of providing a listed terrorist organization with material support in the most egregious, overt case since the code was written. The staggering scale of training, arming, and providing air support for Libyan Islamic Fighting Group militants, listed by the US State Department itself as a terrorist organization, all done criminally under the guise of “international law” rubber stamped by the contrived UN and bolstered with support from the equally contrived International Criminal Court, may be partially why more people are unable to understand the scope of criminality involved in NATO’s intervention in Libya.

Now, getting back to the censorship campaign by of the Stop NATO website, there is no way that anyone could possibly interpret Rick Rozoff’s blog as anything but merely compiling information on NATO’s latest acts of illegal and criminal wars of aggression. There has been no incitement of violence or any encouragement of any illegality on the Stop NATO website. On the contrary, Rozoff’s blog is pointing out NATO’s criminality.

However, there have been people who seem to be inciting violence and who have been acting with recklessness, and they are our very own U.S. government officials. For example, Janet Napolitano and Barack Obama have been recently referring to Tea Partiers, people who have been calling for fiscal responsibility and no more increases in debts, as “terrorists,” which is a way of implying that Napolitano and Obama would actually put Tea Party people on “terror watch lists.” And these government Stasi-types may be inciting violence against Tea Partiers at Tea Party Town Hall meetings or protests.

The U.S. should have pulled out of NATO and the UN  long ago, and evicted any NATO offices there might be in the U.S., as well as evicted the UN from New York. Let the murderous NATO and the anti-American UN stay in Europe and handle their own problems and defense. Americans are tired of being taken advantage of, tired of their hard-earned worthless dollars being taken away to support these internationalist organizations.

Bottom line: If you are an internationalist, a globalist and a collectivist, then you probably support NATO, and good luck to you. But if you believe in individual liberty and freedom of association, property rights, non-entangling governments, national sovereignty and the rule of law, then you are probably with me on this.